That's not what that column is supposed to mean afaict. The way I read it is it's showing that if the website requires hundreds of different parallel backend service calls to serve the page load, what's the probability a page load hits the p99 instrumentation latency?
We have a similar chart at my job to illustrate the point that high p99 latency on a backend service doesn't mean only 1% of end-user page loads are affected.
I don't want my own office. If I wanted to work in a room by myself, I would work from home. The whole reason I go to the office at a job that lets me choose is because I find it easier to be productive when sitting with my teammates.
You do not have the right to force your personal religious views onto other people though. Tolerance does not mean everyone else has to allow you to dictate how they live their lives.
I don't think it's fair to complain that you're not interested in reading about the state of venture capitalism on an article titled "The State of Private Markets". The article delivered exactly what it promised in the title.
By law, if the FDIC takes losses to the insurance fund to pay out on uninsured deposits, they have to charge an extra premium to the member banks. So it's still the banks paying for it.
Why would banks take more risk with their deposits? The bank executives, shareholders, and bondholders wouldn't be personally affected by the loss of deposits anyway so I'm not sure they would care either way. If deposits aren't guaranteed, they lose their investment, and if they are, they still lose their investment.
> Unless the insurance is paid for by the banks themselves
It is though. The FDIC insurance fund is funded by premiums paid by banks.
This is also assuming that the sale of SVB's assets doesn't end up covering the full cost, and that the remaining cost is large enough to result in a meaningfully sized special assessment on FDIC member banks. My understanding is that neither of these outcomes are a given or even likelier than not.
Maps has become buggier and buggier over time. These days I can't figure out how to use the UI and my navigation to work has become completely wrong (it used to be correct for years) out of nowhere.
The process is quite complex so it's usually too heavy handed for a project of this size. That's why people look for an existing nonprofit to take it on. But if kloch mainly wants a couple other people who care about the project to be around to make sure it continues, I'm onboard.
I'm 25 and I'd totally take it on, but you're probably looking for an actual nonprofit if you want true survivability. As someone who has used this tool for at least 10+ years (as long as I've known what an IP address is), I'd love to help make sure it stays around.
I work on TAO consistency at FB and we've put out a bunch more articles/papers in the past couple years. Until 2 years ago, there was just the 2013 paper on TAO itself.
We have a similar chart at my job to illustrate the point that high p99 latency on a backend service doesn't mean only 1% of end-user page loads are affected.